You are not storing any indicator that a merge commit is a merge and not just a regular commit, let alone which of those other throw-away tags was the one merged in. How do you propose that any tool devised to annotate code based on history should work when faced with this system?
$h=$ENV{HOME};my@q=split/\n\n/,`cat $h/.quotes`;$s="$h/." ."signature";$t=`cat $s`;print$t,"\n",$q[rand($#q)],"\n";
In reply to Re^6: [OT] Best Use of Subversion Branches in Perl Development
by mugwumpjism
in thread [OT] Best Use of Subversion Branches in Perl Development
by jkeenan1
| For: | Use: | ||
| & | & | ||
| < | < | ||
| > | > | ||
| [ | [ | ||
| ] | ] |